Loading...
Agenda 04/29/2003 W COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MASTER PLAN WORKSHOP AGENDA April 29, 2003 9:00 a.m. Tom Henning, Chairman, District 3 Donna Fiala, Vice-Chair, District 1 Frank Halas, Commissioner, District 2 Fred W. Coyle, Commissioner, District 4 Jim Coletta, Commissioner, District 5 NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA 1TEM MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 99-22 REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT. REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS". ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO FIVE (5) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN. 1 IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (239) 774-8380; ASSISTED LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE. 0 Pledge of Allegiance Agenda a. Harrison Road/Palm Drive Pork Chop (right in to and right out from the County Complex) - Skip Camp b. Master Plan for Additions/Revisions to the County's Government Complex - Skip Camp c. Growth Management Plan (GMP) Evaluation and Appraisal- Stan Litsinger d. Land Development Code (LDC) Revision-Review of Progress - Patrick White Question and Answer Period Adjourn 2 04/28/03 13:38 FAX 9416436968 COLLIER CO COM~qJNITY DEV ~002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PRESENTATION OF AN EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT (EAR) WORKSHOP TO IDENTIFY THE SCOPE, EMPHASIS, AND STATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPLETION OF THE SECOND EAR ON THE COLLIER COUNTY STATUTORY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) AS REQUIRED BY FLORIDA STATUTES OBJECTIVE: To apprise the Board of requirements of the EAR development process due for completion on January 1, 2004 and to receive Board direction on staff recommended areas of concentration and major local and regional issues. BACKGROUND: HISTORY: The County's first EAR was done in 1997 through the collaboration of a 25-member appointed committee and auxiliary subcommittees. The final outcome of these committees was the ratification of both the 1997 EAR-Based Elements as amended and the 1999 Capital Improvement Element as amended. On June 22, 1999, the Governor and Cabinet of the State of Florida issued a Final Order mandating certain revisions to Collier County's 1997 EAR-Based Elements. Each local government shall adopt an evaluation 'and appraisal report once every 7 years, which is Collier County's 2"d EAR cycle, assessing the progress in implementing the local government's comprehensive plan. REQUIREMENTS: In regards to the actual EAR process, prior to 1998, the requirements were uniform. That meant that every local government, regardless of its size or circumstances, had similar reports. The effect of the legislation adopted in 1998 was to allow local governments to evaluate only those major, local issues that pertain to their respective community. SCHEDULE: The EAR process consists of 12 chronological steps before being transmitted to the DCA for final review on January 1, 2004. DCA INVOLMEMENT: The Department of Community Affairs is the primary reviewing agency. However, the Department of Transportation, Department of Environmental Protection, the South Florida Water Management District, the Southwest Regional Planning Council, and the Division of Historic Resources at the Department of State also review the EAR. Copies are provided to adjacent local governments who may also review and provide comments. 04/28/03 13:39 FAX 9416436968 COLLIER CO CO~'I/NI~ DEV ~003 DCA is responsible for determining whether the EAR is sufficient. The Florida Statutes uses the term "sufficient" to describe the condition where the EAR is adequate for the community's needs. In addition to being sufficient, the EAR has to address the following items listed below in 163.3191 (2), F.S.: New population estimates (163.3191 [2][a], F.S.) · Identification of changes in land area, including annexation, since the plan was adopted (163.3191 [2][a], F.S.) · Discussion of extent (amount and location) and suitability of land that is vacant and available for development (163.319112][b], F.S.) Discussion of the demands of growth on infrastructure, maintaining the level of service, providing public services and facilities, concurrency management, and financial feasibility of the plan (163.319112][c], F.S.) · Discussion of whether development has located where it was anticipated in the original plan (163.3191 [2][d], F.S.) Coordination of the local comprehensive plan with existing public schools and the school district facilities work program (163.3191 [2][k], F.S.) · Identification of changes in designated urban infill and redevelopment areas (163.251716][a], F.S.) · Local issue(s) (163.319112][e], F.S.) · Brief assessment of successes or shortcomings of each element (163.319112][h], F.S.) Identification of changes to residential, commercial, and institutional development within a designated urban infill and redevelopment area (163.251716][a], F.S.) CONSIDERATIONS: Unlike the first EAR, not every Goal, Objective, and Policy in the GMP needs to be individually analyzed. Major issues that affect Collier County's ability to achieve its community goals will be addressed. A brief evaluation of each Element and Sub-element of the GMP is required in addition to the previously identified local and regional issues. FISCAL IMPACTS: There will be no associated costs to this EAR-BCC Workshop GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Chapter 163, Part II, section 163.3191 - Evaluation and Appraisal of Comprehensive Plan 2 04/28/03 13:39 FAX 9416436968 COLLIER CO CO~tlJNITY DEV ~004 RECOMMENDATION: That the BCC review staff recommended EAR process and scooping recommendations and provide policy direction for completion of the second EAR cycle. Darren Murphy, pla~ne~° Comp_.rehensive Plan~ng.,.Section REVIEWED BY.. ~~u~-~ ~ Date: S'~a~' Litsinger, .~ICP f C~~ eh ensive PI ann~~ REVIEWED BY: Marga "'re~uerstle, AICP Date: SUBMITTED BY: Pla. nning Services Dire~el'or APPROVED B~ / ~°mmunity Dev_elop. rnent_ &.. {nvironmental Services Division Date: Date: 3 EVALUATION AND APPRAISA. L REPORTS Chapter 163.3191, Florida Statutes The evaluation and appraisal report is a summary audit of the progress that has been made in implementing a local government's comprehensive plan. The report identifies changes that should be made in the plan in respond to an e,,aluation of the successes and failures that have been experienced in implementation the plan, to changing trends and conditions that affect the local community, and to changing state and regional growth management policies. With assistance from state and regional agencies. adjacent local governments and the.:public, the evaluation begins with the identification of the major issues that will be the focus of the evaluation. The following topics should be addressed in the evaluation and appraisal report: [see 163.3191(2)]: Community-wide Assessment: 1) Population growth and changes in land area 2) The location of existing development in relation to the location of development as anticipated in the plan 3) The extent of vacant and undevelopable land 4) The financial feasibility of providing needed infrastructure to achieve and maintain adopted level of service standards and sustain concurrency' through capital improvements, as well as the ability to address mfrastructt,re backlogs and meet the demands of growth of public services and facilities 5) A briefassessrnent of successes and shortcomings related to each element Relevant changes in growth management laws (the state comprehensive plan. the appropriate strategic regional policy plan. chapter 163, part 11, F.S.. and chapter 9J-5, F.A.C.} 7) A summary of public p:~rticipation activities in preparing the report Evaluation of Major Issues: 8) The identification of major issues and. where pertinent, tile potential social, economic, and environmental impacts or'these Issues 9) An assessment of whether plan objectives within each element, as they relate to major issues, have been achieved, and x~hether untbreseen and unanticipated changes in circumstances have resulted in problems and opportunities with respect major issues in each element ,-kn~ actions or corrective measures, including v,'hether plan flmendments are anttctpated to a(tdress the major ~sst,es:- identified and analyzed in the report. Such identification shall mclude, as appropriate, nex~ [~opulanon projections, next revised plannmg time-t?ames, a revised future conditions map or map series, all updated carmal mlprovements element, and an~ nex~ and re,,ised goals, obiectives and pelicies for the major issues identified ~ithin each element Special Topics: An assessment of the success or thilure ot'coordinatinu Ihture land uses and residential development with tl~e existin~ and planned schouls: establishing with the schoo[ board al~propnate population Drolecuons: and coordinat~tm tl~c · ~i1 ,lSSeSSille:lt of'tile colnprotlt2rlsD, e plall \t, ith Fespect 'to tile water lltanagenlent district's FeglO!lal u, ater sllppl} I'~Jdll, mclud~nu x~ hether the potuble water element should be re, ~sed to mclude a ~ork plan, co,,.erm,, at least a 10-x ear pertod. !bt building x~a~er suppl.,, facilities Ibr ~llich the local go~,ernment is responsible that are needed to serve ex/sting and protected development An e,,aluati0n ofx~hether an~ past reduction itl land use densitx x,,ithin the coastal hilgh-hazard area tmpatrs the property rights ot'current residents when redexelopment'occurs. Yhelocalgoxermnentmustidenti& strateg~es to address redexeh~pmem and the rl,.2'l~,ts ofuffected residents balanced against public safety considerations 3. PREPARE LIST OF ISSUES 1. IDENTIFY WHO WILL PREPARE EAR [' '~ PLANNING BOARD 4. scop,NO t MEETING ~ 5. FINAL LIST OF ISSUES FOR EAR COLLECT ; '41 I'FI£'II!N']' 13 \ Iq-:(ilN i'l..\N' \\IFND\It:N I'", ~ JL[ 8. REV1SE 9 TR..\NSMIT PROPOSED EAR 1-() DC-X to. RE~ ISE EAR ~',~:~';:[ PLANNING BOARD Gt ERXLPLBIIL ~ 12 TRANSMIT j ~ NOT . ' ADOPTEDEAR , ~ SUFFICIENTI -statutes->View Statutes->2OOO->ChO163->Section 3191: Online Sunshine Page 1 of 5 View Statutes Select Year: ~ Search Statutes Constitution Laws of Florida Order The 2000 Florida Statutes Title XI Chapter 163 COUNTY ORGANIZATION AND Intergovernmental INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS Programs 116:3.3191 Evaluation and appraisal of comprehensive plan.-- View Entire Chapter (1) The planning program shall be a continuous and ongoing process. Each local government shall adopt an evaluation and appraisal report once every 7 years assessing the progress in implementing the local government's comprehensive plan. Furthermore, it is the intent of this section that: (a) Adopted comprehensive plans be reviewed through such evaluation process to respond to changes in state, regional, and local policies on planning and growth management and changing conditions and trends, to ensure effective intergovernmental coordination, and to identify major issues regarding the community's achievement of its goals. (b) After completion of the initial evaluation and appraisal report and any supporting plan amendments, each subsequent evaluation and appraisal report must evaluate the comprehensive plan in effect at the time of the initiation of the evaluation anQ appraisal report process. (c) Local governments identify the major issues, if applicable, with input from state agencies, regional agencies, adjacent local governments, and the public in the evaluation and appraisal report process. It is also the intent of this section to establish minimum requirements for information to ensure predictability, certainty, and integrity in the growth management process. The report is intended to serve as a summary audit of the actions that a local government has undertaken and identify changes that it may need to make. The report should be based on the local government's analysis of major issues to further the community's goals consistent with statewide minimum standards. The report is not intended to require a comprehensive rewrite of the elements within the local plan, unless a local government chooses to do so. (2) The report shall present an evaluation and assessment of the comprehensive plan and shall contain appropriate statements to update the comprehensive plan, including, but not limited to, words, maps, illustrations, or other media, related to: (a) Population growth and changes in land area, including annexation, since the adoption of the original plan or the most recent update amendments. (b) The extent of vacant and developable land. (c) The financial feasibility of implementing the comprehensive plan and of providing needed infrastructure to achieve and maintain adopted level-of-service standards and sustain concurrency management systems through the capital improvements element, as well as the ability to address infrastructure backlogs and meet the demands of growth on public services and facilities. (d) The location of existing development in relation to the location of development as anticipated in the original plan, or in the plan as amended by the most recent evaluation and appraisal report update amendments, such as within areas designated for urban growth. (e) An identification of the major issues for the jurisdiction and, where pertinent, the potential social, economic, and environmental impacts. http ://www. leg. state, fi.us/statutes/index, cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&UKL=C 1/30/200t statutes->View Statutes->2000->Ch0163->Section 3191: Online Sunshine Page 2 of 5 (f) Relevant changes to the state comprehensive plan, the requirements of this part, the minimum criteria contained in chapter 93-5, Florida Administrative Code, and the appropriate strategic regional policy plan since the adoption of the original plan or the most recent evaluation and appraisal report update amendments. (g) An assessment of whether the plan objectives within each element, as they relate to major issues, have been achieved. The report shall include, as appropriate, an identification as to whether unforeseen or unanticipated changes in circumstances have resulted in problems or opportunities with respect to major issues identified in each element and the social, economic, and environmental impacts of the issue. (h) A brief assessment of successes and shortcomings related to each element of the plan. (i) The identification of any actions or corrective measures, including whether plan amendments are anticipated to address the major issues identified and analyzed in the report. Such identification shall include, as appropriate, new population projections, new revised planning timeframes, a revised future conditions map or map series, an updated capital improvements element, and any new and revised goals, objectives, and policies for major issues identified within each element. This paragraph shall not require the submittal of the plan amendments with the evaluation and appraisal report. (j) A summary of the public participation program and activities undertaken by the local government in preparing the report. (k) The coordination of the comprehensive plan with existing public schools and those identified in the applicable 5-year school district facilities work program adopted pursuant to s. 235.185. The assessment shall address, where relevant, the success or failure of the coordination of the future land use map and associated planned residential development with public schools and their capacities, as well as the joint decisionmaking processes engaged in by the local government and the school board in regard to establishing appropriate population projections and the planning and siting of public school facilities. If the issues are not relevant-,,the local government shall demonstrate that they are not relevant. (3) Voluntary scoping meetings may be conducted by each local government or several local governments within the same county that agree to meet together. Joint meetings among all local governments in a county are encouraged. All scoping meetings shall be completed at least I year prior to the established adoption date of the report. The purpose of the meetings shall be to distribute data and resources available to assist in the preparation of the report, to provide input on major issues in each community that should be addressed in the report, and to advise on the extent of the effort for the components of subsection (2). Tf scoping meetings are held, the local- government shall invite each state and regional reviewing agency, as well as adjacent and other affected local governments. A preliminary list of new data and major issues that have emerged since the adoption of the original plan, or the most recent evaluation and .appraisal report-based update amendments, should be developed by state and regional entities and involved local governments for distribution at the scoping meeting. For purposes of this subsection, a "scoping meeting" is a meeting conducted to determine the scope of review of the evaluation and appraisal report by parties to which the report relates. (4) The local planning agency shall prepare the evaluation and appraisal report and shall make recommendations to the governing body regarding adoption of the proposed report. The local planning agency shall prepare the report in conformity with its public participation procedures adopted as required by s. 163.3181. During the preparation of the proposed report and prior to making any recommendation to the governing body, the local planning agency shall hold at least one public hearing, with public notice, on the proposed report. At a minimum, the format and content of the proposed report shall include a table of contents; numbered pages; element headings; section headings within elements; a list of included tables, maps, and figures; a title and sources for ail included tables; .a preparation date; and the name of the preparer. Where applicable, maps shall include major natural and artificial geographic features; city, county, and state lines; and a legend indicating a north arrow, map scale, and the date. (5) Ninety days prior to the scheduled adoption date, the local government may provide a proposed evaluation and appraisal report to the state land planning agency and distribute copies to state and regional commenting agencies as prescribed by rule, adjacent jurisdictions, and http ://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.c frn?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL_wC 1/30/2001 statutes->View Statutes->2000->Ch0163->Section 3191: Online Sunshine Page 3 of 5 interested citizens for review. All review comments, including comments by the state land planning agency, shall be transmitted to the local government and state land planning agency within 30 days after receipt of the proposed report. 2(6) The governing body, after considering the review comments and recommended changes, if any, shall adopt the evaluation and appraisal report by resolution or ordinance at a public hearing with public notice. The governing body shall adopt the report in conformity with its public participation procedures adopted as required by s. :[63.318:[. The local government shall submit to the state land planning agency three copies of the report, a transmittal letter indicating the dates of public hearings, and a copy of the adoption resolution or ordinance. The local government shall provide a copy of the report to the reviewing agencies which provided comments for the proposed report, or to all the reviewing agencies if a proposed report was not provided pursuant to subsection (5), including the adjacent local governments. Within 60 days after receipt, the state land planning agency shall review the adopted report and make a preliminary sufficiency determination that shall be forwarded by the agency to the local government for its consideration. The state land planning agency shall issue a final sufficiency determination within 90 days after receipt of the adopted evaluation and appraisal report. (7) The intent of the evaluation and appraisal process is the preparation of a plan update that clearly and concisely achieves the PUrpose of this section. Toward this end, the sufficiency review of the state land planning agency shall concentrate on whether the evaluation and appraisal report sufficiently fulfills the components of subsection (2). ]If the state land planning agency determines that the report is insufficient, the governing body shall adopt a revision of the report and submit the revised report for review pursuant to subsection (6). 3(8) The state land planning agency may delegate the review of evaluation and appraisal reports; including all state land planning agency duties under subsections (4)-(7), to the appropriate regional planning council. When the review has been delegated to a regional planning council, any local government in the region may elect to have its report reviewed by the regional planning council rather than the state land planning agency. The state land planning agency shall by agreement provide for uniform and adequate review of repo~s and shall retain oversight for any delegation of review to a regional planning council. (9) The state land planning agency may establish a phased schedule for adoption of reports. The schedule shall provide each local government at least 7 years from plan adoption or last established adoption date for a report and shall allot approximately one-seventh of the reports to any I year. ]In order to allow the municipalities to use data and analyses gathered by the counties, the state land planning agency shall schedule municipal report adoption dates between I year and 18 months later than the report adoption date for the county in which those municipalities are located. A local government may adopt its report no earlier than 90 days prior to the established- adoption date. Small municipalities which were scheduled by chapter 93-33, Florida Administrative Code, to adopt their evaluation and appraisal report after February 2, 1999, shall be rescheduled to adopt their report together with the other municipalities in their county as provided in this subsection. (10) The governing body shall amend its comprehensive plan based on the recommendations in ' the report and shall update the comprehensive plan based on the components of subsection (2), pursuant to the provisions of ss. :[63.3:[84, :[63.3:[87, and :[63.3:[89. Amendments to update a comprehensive plan based on the evaluation and appraisal report shall be adopted within 18 months after the report is determined to be sufficient by the state land planning agency, except the state land planning agency may grant an extension for adoption of a portion of such amendments. The state land planning agency may grant a 6-month extension for the adoption of such amendments if the request is justified by good and sufficient cause as determined by the agency. An additional extension may also be granted if the request will result in greater coordination between transportation and land use, for the purposes of improving Florida's transportation system, as determined by the agency in coordination with the Metropolitan Planning Organization program. The comprehensive plan as amended shall be in compliance as defined in s. 163,3184(:[)(b). (11) The Administration Commission may impose the sanctions provided by s. 163.3184(:[1) against any local government that fails to adopt and submit a report, or that fails to implement report through timely and sufficient amendments to its local plan, except for reasons of excusable delay or valid planning reasons agreed to by the state land planning agency or found present by http ://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.c frn?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&U-RL=.C 1/30/2001 statutes->View Statutes->2OOO->ChO 163->Section 3191: Online Sunshine Page 4 of 5 the Administration Commission. Sanctions for untimely or insufficient plan amendments shall be prospective only and shall begin after a final order has been issued by the Administration Commission and a reasonable period of time has been allowed for the local government to comply with an adverse determination by the Administration Commission through adoption of plan amendments that are in compliance. The state land planning agency may initiate, and an affected person may intervene in, such a proceeding by filing a petition with the Division of Administrative Hearings, which shall appoint an administrative law judge and conduct a hearing pursuant to ss. 120.569 and 120.57(1) and shall submit a recommended order to the Administration Commission. The affected local government shall be a party to any such proceeding. The commission may implement this subsection by rule. (12) The state land planning agency shall not adopt rules to implement this section, other than procedural rules. (::[3) The state land planning agency shall regularly review the evaluation and appraisal report process and submit a report to the Governor, the Administration Commission, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the President of the Senate, and the respective community affairs committees of the Senate and the House of Representatives. The first report shall be submitted by December 31, 2004, and subsequent reports shall be submitted every 5 years thereafter. At least 9 months before the due date of each report, the Secretary of Community Affairs shall appoint a technical committee of at least 15 members to assist in the preparation of the report. The membership of the technical committee shall consist of representatives of local governments, regional planning councils, the private sector, and environmental organizations. The report shall assess the effectiveness of the evaluation and appraisal report process. History.--s. 11, ch. 75-257; s. 10, ch. 85-55; s. 11, ch. 86-191; s. 10, ch. 92-129; s. 13, ch. 93- 206; s. 6, ch. 95-322; s. 29, ch. 96-410; s. 5, ch. 96-416; s. 4, ch. 98-146; ss. 6, 14, ch. 98-176; s. 5, ch. 98-258; s. 17, ch. 2000-158. & 1Note.--As amended and substantially reworded by s. 14, ch. 98-176. Former paragraph (12)(a) was also amended by s. 5, ch. 98-258, without reference to..the substantial rewording of the section by s. 14, ch. 98-176. As amended by s. 5, ch. 98-258, only, paragraph (12)(a) reads: (12)(a) The state land planning agency may enter into a written agreement with a municipality of fewer than 5,000 residents or a county with fewer than 75,000 residents so that such a jurisdiction may focus planning resources on selected issues or elements when updating its plan, if the local government includes such a request in its report and the agency approves the request. Approval of the request does not authorize the local government to repeal or render ineffective any existing portion or element of its local plan. 2Note.--As amended and substantially reworded by s. 14, ch. 98-176. Former subsection (9) was also amended by s. 4, ch. 98-146, without reference to the substantial rewording of the section by s. 14, ch. 98-176; material similar to that found in former subsection (9)is now located in ' subsection (6), as amended by s. 14, ch. 98-176. As amended by s. 4, ch. 98-146, only, subsection (9), redesignated as subsection (6) to conform to the placement of material by s. 14, ch. 98-176, reads: (6) The state land planning agency shall conduct a sufficiency review of each report to determine whether it has been submitted in a timely fashion and contains the prescribed components. The agency shall complete the sufficiency determination within 60 days of receipt of the report. The agency shall not conduct a compliance review. However, a local government may request that the department provide substantive comments regarding the report or addendum during the department's sufficiency review to assist the local government in the adoption of its plan amendments based on the evaluation and appraisal report. Comments provided during the sufficiency review are not binding on the local government or the department and will not supplant or limit the department's consistency review of the amendments based on the adopted evaluation and appraisal report. A request for.comments must be made in writing by the local government and must be submitted at the same time the adopted report is submitted for sufficiency review. 3Note.--As amended and substantially reworded by s. 14, ch. 98-176. Former subsection (10) was also amended by s. 4, ch. 98-146, without reference to the substantial rewording of the section by s. 14, ch. 98-:L76; material similar to that found in former subsection (10) is now located in subsection (8), as amended by s. 14, ch. 98-176. As amended by s. 4, ch. 98-146, http ://www.leg.state. fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL--.C 1/30/2001 statutes->View Statutes->2OOO->ChO 163->Section 3191: Online Sunshine Page 5 of 5 only, subsection (10), redesignated as subsection (8) to conform to the placement of material by s. 14, ch. 98-176, reads: (8) The state land planning agency may delegate the review of reports to the appropriate regional planning council. When the review has been delegated to a regional planning council, any local government in the region, except for areas of critical state concern, may elect to have its report reviewed by the council rather than the agency. The agency shall adopt rules for accepting requests for delegation and for uniform and adequate review of reports. The agency shall retain oversight for any delegation of review to a regional planning council. Any plan amendment recommended by the,report shall be reviewed by the agency pursuant to s. 163.3184 and be adopted by the local government pursuant to s. 163.3189. Welcome · Session · Committees · Legislators · Information Center · Statutes and Constitution · Lobbyist Information Disclaimer: The information on this system is unverified. The journals or printed bills of the respective chambers should be consulted for official purposes. Copyright © 2000 State of Florida. Contact us. http ://www.leg. state.fl.us/statutes/index.c fm?App_rnode=Display_Statute&S earch_String=&URL=.C 1/30/2001 EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT COMPARISON Of OLD AND NEW REQUIREMENTS OLD 1. CONDITIONS OF EACH ELEMENT AT THE TIME OF PLAN ADOPTION, INCLUDING A SUMMARY OF THE ORIGINAL DATA AND ANALYSIS. Now, no such requirement: ':Fhe EAR should not include an element-by, element summary of the original comprehensive plan or the plan as updated as a result of the prior EAR. based amendments. OLD 2. CONDITION OF EACH ELEMENT AT THE DATE OF REPORT. Now, no need to summarize current conditions within the community on an element, by-element basis. Of course, the EAR should include information regarding trends and current conditions for the major issues on which the EAR is focused. The EAR should also address population growth, changes in land area, vacant land and the location of existing development as compared to the location anticipated in the plan [see 163.3191 (2)(a, b and c)]. Data and analysis needed to address the other minimum EAR requirements should also be included in the EAR, including a brief assessment of the successes and shortcomings of each element. [I 63.319 I(2)(j)] OLD 3. COMPARISON OF THE PLAN'S ADOPTED OBJECTIVES WITH ACTUAL RESULTS TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE OBJECTIVES HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED. Now, the evaluation of objectives should focus on those objective~ that are related to the major issues and minimum EAR content requirements. For example, when assessing coordinated school planning, evaluate the achievement of oblectives related to school siting and ~eordination. The community should decide the extent to whmh its success/n achieving other planning objectives should be evaluated. OLD ~,. MAJOR PROBLEMS OF DEVELOPMENT, PHYSICAL DETERIORATION, LOCATION OF LAND USES AND THE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC EFFECTS OF THE MAJOR PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED. For each ma/or issue, the EAR should include a description of the social, economic and environment~/ impacts of the ~ssue. [t OLD 5. UNANTICIPATED AND UNFORESEEN PROBLEMS AND OPPORTUNITIES THAT OCCURRED SINCE ADOPTION, INCLUDING A DESCRIPTION OF UNFORESEEN PROBLEMS/OPPORTUNITIES AND THEIR IMPACT ON THE PLAN. The evaluation of plan oblect~ves should ~nc/ude ~a d~scussJon of whether unforeseen changes ~n c]rcum- stances have created problems or opportunihes related to each major ~ssue. [ ~. 63.3 t 91 (2)(0] OLD 6. EFFECT ON THE LOCAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; CONSISTENCY OF THE PLAN WITH THE SCP, SRPP, 9J-5 AND 163. Yes. The EAR should eva,uate changes ~n state taw and the SRPP and zdentify changes needed zn the comprehensive plan. [: 55.3 ! 9 ~ (2)(k)] OLD 7. IDENTIFICATION OF ANY NEEDED ACTIONS TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING ISSUES RAISED IN THE REPORT. Yes, focusing on the ma/or issues. [163.3191 (2)(I)] OLD 8. IDENTIFICATION OF PROPOSED OR ANTICIPATED PLAN AMENDMENTS TO ADDRESS OR IMPLEMENT THE IDENTIFIED CHANGES. Yes, the EAR should still ~dentify any actions or corrective measure, including needed plan amendments. to address the major issues identified and analyzed in the report. However, the new EARs should not m- dude an exhaustive list of every m/nor update or change that may be desirable throughout the entire plan. Rather, the EAR should focus on changes that are recommended to respond to the conclusion reached during the evaluation of the major issues that were the focus of the EAR. [ ~ 63.319 OLD 9. DESCRIBE THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS USED IN THE PREPARATION OF THE REPORT. Yes, EAt~ should include a summary of the public participation activities undertaken during the EAR process. [163.3191(2)(m)/ In addition, the Legislature has added four new requirements: 1. An evaluation of the financial feasibility of providing needed infrastructure to maintain adopted tevel of service standards [!63.3t91(2)(d)] 2. An assessment of the success or failure of coordinating residential development with existing school capacity and coordinating the planning programs of the local government and school board. [163.3191(2)(g)~ 3. An evaiuat~on of the ~vater management district's reg~onat water supply plan and whether-the comorehe~m~ve plan shculd be rewsed to include a water supply facilities workptan. [163.3 !9 i(2)(h)] , 4 An evaluation of non-conforming dens~tles ~n the coastal h~gh-hazard area. [163.3191{2){i)} 1/3/03 APPROACH FOR IDENTIFYING MAJOR ISSUES 1. Public Visioning Process: Vision Statement 2. Internal County Meetings: 1st draft of major issues list 3. County/Cities Meeting: 2n~i draft 4. County/DCA Meeting: 3rd draft 5. Scoping Meeting with state/regional agencies: Final List 6. Letter of Understanding between County and DCA SAMPLE SCOPING MEETING AGENDA Date Time Location 1. Introduction of attendees and circulation of sign-in sheet 2. Purpose of Scoping Meeting (discuss process used to formulate major issues list, need to reach agreement on list and level of effort for components of the EAR, sharing of data, coordination with municipalities) 3. Level of Effo~ for Required Components (discuss 163.3191 (2)(a - m) components of the EAR and level of effort for each component, discuss available agency data related to each component) 4. Preliminary Major Issues List (discuss preliminary list of. major planning issues) 5. Agency Input (discuss each agency's list of suggested issues) 6. Agreement on Issues and Level of Effort (discuss integration of agency suggestions (item 5) with preliminary list (item 4)' to arrive at final list of major issues) 7. Next Steps (discuss Letter of Understanding with DCA, EAR preparation and adoption schedule) C:~DOCUME- I~LITSIN- lkLOCALS- l\Temp\Scoping Meeting Agenda.doc PRELIMINARY MAJOR ISSUES IN THE SOUTHWEST (As perceived by DCA) For the EAR Forum of 1/13/03 (Local Governments Participating: Lee, Charlotte, and Collier Counties) ~ o o The maintenance of LOS on major regional roadways: - Has the LOS worsened or improved? - If it has worsened, what particular development pattern aggraxated the situation? - What could the region and each local government focus on during the EAR update to help deal with the situation? - Examples of what to do include establishing alternative development patterns, and alternative routes. The growth pressures occurring on the eastern positions of the region - have all the counties come to terms with this and established a strategy for dealing with it? - Do the comprehensive plans include strategies to effectively manage this growth pressure so that growth can occur in a form that ensures the protection of major natural systems, discourages urban sprawl, maximizes the utilization of resources and creates sustainable and meaningful urban forms? Collier and Sarasota Counties appear to have done this. Has hurricane evacuation clearance time improved or gotten worse? - What can be done to maintain or improve it? - Solutions have to consider land use patterns and'the LOS on roadways (evacuation routes). Coastal High Hazard Areas: How successful has the plan been to direct population concentration from these areas? Was this achieved in our counties? - If yes, how? What type of data and analysis do we need to substantiate this, and - If no, why? What data do we have or need to show' that? - What should be done next? The protection of major regional natural resource systems -wetlands. vital habitats etc.; was it achieved? - If yes, based on what indicator or benchmark?- ~ - If no, why and what can be done to achieve greater protection? The undeveloped platted areas of the counties - Are they properly utilized for urban growth in a manner that will produce the desired urban form? - What obstacles do they present for the management of growth? - ~= ,,e need to reassess these areas and devise/h~clude strategies in t'.:_ comprehensive plans to overcome this drawback? Linking Water Supply and Land Use Planning: Does the region have adequate water at the sources to support the projected growth of the region? - How could we better plan the utilization of these resources? Linking Land Use. and School Facilities Planning:- Are we doing a good job? - How could we use ihe interlocal agreement process to achieve better coordination? How do we ensure that land utilization does not outpace school facilities planning? Coordinating Land Use and Water Supply Planning · Guidelines for Preparing the Water Supply Facilities Workplan Comprehensive Plan Amendment Regional Water Supply Plans Power Point Presentation GUIDELINES FOR PREPARING THE WATER SUPPLY FACILITIES WORKPLAN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT The 2002 Legislature expanded the local government comprehensive plan requirements to strengthen coordination of water supply planning and local land use planning. One of the most significant new requirements is a 10-year Water Supply Facilities Workplan. Initially, only those local governments having responsibility for all or a portion of their water supply facilities and located within an area for which a Regional Water Supply Plan (RWSP) has been prepared by the water management district must prepare and adopt the Workplan (by January l, 2005, or their EAR due date, whichever occurs first). Eventually, however, all local governments with water supply facility responsibilities must prepare and adopt a Workplan. These guidelines have been prepared to help local governments understand their responsibilities under the legislation, the data and analysis that must be collected to prepare the Workplan, and the amendments to the comprehensive plan that are required. Also included is a list of sources of information that local governments can use to assist them. These new requirements are summarized below: Coordinate appropriate aspects of ttneir comprehensive plan with the appropriate water management district's regional water supply plan(s). (see s. 163.3177(4)(aL F.S.) Revise the Potable Water sub-element to consider~the regional water supply plan(s) of the appropriate water management district(s). (s. 163.3177(6)(c). F.S. Revise the Potable Water sub-element to include a Water Supply' Facilities Workplan tbr at least a 10-year planning period addressing water supply facilities necessary to serve existing and new development and for which the local government is responsible. (s.163.3177(6)(c). F.S.) Revise the Conservation Element ~o assess projected water needs and sources for at least a lO-year planning period considering the appropriate regional water supply plan(si or. in the absence of an approved regional water supply plamsl, thc district water management plan(s ). (s. 163.3177( 6)(dY, F.S. ) Revise tine Intergovernmental Coordination Element to ensure coordination of the comprehensive plan with the applicable regional water supply plan/s I. (s.163.3 177(6)(h)l.. F.S.) 6. Consider. during preparation of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report, the appropriate regional ,a'ater supply plan. (s. 163.3191(2)(1). F.S.) Page I of 1-' During preparation of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report and adoption of EAR- based amendments, revise the Potable Water Sub-element to include the Water Supply Facilities Workplan. (s. 163.3191 (2)(1), F.S.) When to Adopt the Water Supply Facilities Workplan Amendment: Local governments having responsibility for water supply facilities and located within areas with approved RWSPs should, by January 1, 2005, or the EAR due date, whichever is earlier: ao Amend the Potable Water Sub-element to incorporate consideration of the appropriate RWSP. Amend the Potable Water Sub-element to include a Water Supply Facilities Workplan for at least a 10-year period tbr those water supply facilities necessary to serve existing and new development and for which they are responsible. c. Amend, if necessary, the Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements. do During the regularly scheduled EAR up.date, the local government must also comply with corollary requirements for the consep, mtion element and intergovernmental coordination element (s~ee paragraphs 4 and 5 on page one of these guidelines). While these corollary requirements are not explicitly required I-'or the completion of the Workplan due January I. 2005. it is recommended they be completed concurrently to provide assurance that the Workplan adequately addresses the water supply thcilities needed tbr the projected 10-year period. Local governments that are not located within areas with approved RWSPs should, as part of their EAR-based amendment, complete all of the above requirements. When revising the Conservation Element to include projected needs and sources. consideration should be given to tlne district's water management plan includino the Districtwide VVater Supply Assessment. since no RWSP exists tbr these areas. ~:ote: A RV,,'SP could exist lbr portions of these areas in the Future.] PREPARING THE WATER SUPPLY FACILITIES WORKPLAN General: The \Vater Supply Facilities X,Vorkplan should ensure the construction of water suppl.,.' facilities that are necessary to serve existing and new development for at leas~ a 10-vear planning period. The Workplan should address those facilities that are necessary to serve existing dnd new development and tbr xvtnich the local government ~s responsible. Page 2 of 1£ Water supply facilities include all of the infrastructure necessary to withdraw water t¥om its source, and to transmit, treat and distribute the water and any associated storage facilities. Like all plan amendments, the Workplan amendment should be based upon information relevant to the local government's unique circumstances. To prepare the Workplan, a local government could use the following approach: Getting Started: If your commumtv is located in an area with an approved RWSP. you will need to coordinate the Workplan preparation with the water management district regarding demand projections, the use of appropriate water sources to meet projected demand and consideration of water conservation and reuse strategies. Close coordination with the district can avoid concerns when the district reviews your proposed and adopted Workplan. RWSP's are prepared for a 20-year planning timeframe and most include demand projections for five-year increments, such as 2005.2010.2015and2020. You should coordinate with the district to determine the feasibility of using consistent planning increments, since this approach would greatly hcilitate the sharing of consistent data. Each local government should determine the extent to which it is or plans to be involved with the construction, operation, financin~ and planning for potable water supply facilities. Involvement can range from no community facility to total control by the local government tbr withdrawing; treating and distributing potable w'ater. In general, the following guidelines illustrate that the more your comn'mnity is inx olved with water supply planning, the more extensive will be ,,our Workplan. a. In general, ifa local government o~,vns or has responsibility l'br all the ~ater supply t:acilities that serve its community, then it ,,,,'ill need to: I ) Project its need for potable water t-bt at least a ten-year planning period 2) Develop a ten-year Workplan sl'~o,,ving how it ,.viii meet those needs. The X. Vorkplan should reflect consideration of the RWSP. pamcuiari.x witlq t'c~ard ~o adequacy of sources 3) Adopt the ten-year \Vorkplan into the comprehensive plan along appropriate anaendments to tine Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements for an.,,' capital improvements needed during the first t]xe years b. If the local government does not own or have responsibility for any of the x,.ater supply facilities-that serve its community, ti-ten it will need to: Paue 3 of12 Co 1 ) Project its needs tbr at least a ten-year planning period 2) Coordinate with its water supplier(s), which may include another local government(s) to ensure that the supplier(s) will be able to provide enough water to meet the projected need. The information obtained from the water supplier should identity the future water sources and the water supply facilities needed to serve the projected need. The source of water identified by each supplier should reflect consideration of the RWSP 3) Coordinate with the water management district regarding the ability of the water supplier to meet the projected need, particularly with respect to sources and the use of appropriate water conservation and reuse strategies 4) Submit to DCA a. letter and supporting documentation ,from the, water supplier confirming that the water supplier has identified adequate sources. considering the RWSP, and made necessary infrastructure plans to serve the need If the local government owns or has responsibility fbr some (most commonly the distribution network), but not all of the water supply facilities, then it must: 1) Proiect its needs For at least a ten-year planning period 2) Prepare a ten-year Workplan for those faciiities for which it has responsibility 3) Coordinate with its water supplier(s), which may include another local government/s), to ensure that tile supplier(s) will be able to provide enough water to meet the pro.jected need. The intbrmation obtained From the ~ater supplier should identify the future water sources and the xvater suppl> facilities needed to serve the projected needs. The source of ~vater' identified by each supplier slnoutd reflect consideration of the RWSP 4) Coordinate with tile xvater management district regarding the ability of the water supplier to meet tile projected need, particularly with respect to 5oui'cc5 and conservation and reuse strategies 5) .*dopt into the comprehens~xe plan tile ten-year '%'orkplan tbr those components of the water supply system for which the local government has responsibility as well as appropriate amendments to the five-year Capital Improvements plan tbr an,,' capital improvements identified as needed during the first fixe ~ears. Pa,.z,e 4 off2 6) For those components of the water supply system for which the local government does not have responsibility, submit to DCA a letter and supporting documentation t¥om the water supplier confirming that the water supplier has identified adequate sources, considering the RWSP, and made necessary infrastructure plans to serve the need. In the case of one local government serving as the supplier of water to another local govbrnment, the Workplan of the supplying government must separately identify the sources and facilities needed to meet the portion of the projected need of the receiving government for which they are responsible. Review the current Potable Water Sub-element. Identify those sections that do not provide sufficient tbundation for a 10-year Water Supply Facilities Workplan. These are the portions of your plan that will need the most updating and expansion..-The degree to which they ,,,,'ill need to be updated will depend on the extent to which your community is involved in water supply facilities. During the regularly scheduled EAR update, local governments must also comply with corollary requirements tbr the Conservation Element and Intergovernmental Coordination Element. For the Conservation Element, they must "assess their current, as well as projected water needs and sources for at least a 10-vear period, considering the appropriate regional water supply plan ...or, in the absence of a regional water supply plan. the district water management plan .... "For the Intergovernmental Coordination Element, they must show "relationships" and state "principles" and "guidelines" to be used in the accomplishment of coordination of the adopted comprehensive plan with the applicable regional water supply plan. \Vhile the corollary requirements are not explicitly required for the completion of the \Vorkplans due by January 1. 2005. it is recommended they be completed concurrently to provide assurance that tt~e \Vorkplan adequately addresses the water supply Gcilities needed for the projected ten-year period. INFORMATION TO INCLUDE IN THE '~VATER SUPPLY FACILITIES WORKPLAN AMENDMENT Supnortine Data and .-\nalx sis: ldentit\' tine existing potable water facilities for which your local government is responsible, including the location of xxells/or intake point from a surface water source), treatment and storage facilities, and the major distribution mains. Compile ir~lbrmatiol'~ regarding the design capacity of the production and treatment t~cilit~c5, thc current demand on these I"acilities. the geographic area served and relevant xxator use permit conditions and duration. For each geographic service area (the area provided with service by a water Facility), prepare a facility capacity analysis and note capacity surpluses and deficiencies for: a. Existing conditions, including geographic area served, population served and level of service b. Conditions five years in the future based on projected demand, noting capacity surpluses and deficiencies c. Conditions ten years in the future based on projected demand, noting capacity surpluses and deficiencies d. Identify water supply facilities needed to serve projected growth and development tbr each geographic service area for at least the next 10-year period. Prioritize the capital projects needed to serve the projected ten-year needs and include the first five years in the Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements in the Capital h~pFovement Element. The revised Schedule should be adopted as part of the Workplan amendment. Revising the Schedule at the same time the Workplan is adopted will maintain internal consistency within the comprehensive plan. The Workplan should demonstrate that a sufficient supply of water will be available to meet projected needs. Needed xvater m. ight be supplied from more than one source. Conservation and reuse should be examined as critical techniques to reduce the demand for potable water. The water management district is an excellent source oF in/brmation about water sources and you should coordinate closelx with them. If your community is located within a RWSP area, you should rex'iexv tile Regional Water Supply Plan xvith the district staff'. You will want to make sure that you have used compatible projections of water demands and that vouF conclusions regarding water source availability are compatible. You should plan to use water sources, or some combination of sources, identified in the RWSP. If you plan to use other sources of water, you should Fully cooFdinate ~our intention with the district. Adopted Portion of the \Vorkplan Amendment: Based on the SUl_>pox';ing d'~xta and analysis (1-4. above I. the adopted \~'orkplan should: List the potable xx'~tter Facilities that ~ill be needed during at least tile next 10-x caf period, including Fclex ant intbrmation tbF each thcilitv, such as capacity i~ £. Place those listed Facilities in prioFit.,, order. FoF each listed I'acilit'v. identit\': a. The ctnticipated 3eaF of construction, considering tile need tbr permitting and construction b. The water source to be utilized c. The estimated cost of construction d. The source of funds Any facilities needed during the first five years should be adopted as a revision to the Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements. Any needed revision to the goals, objectives and policies of the Potable Water Sub-element should be adopted as part of the Workptan amendment. During the regt, larly scheduled EAR update, the local government must also comply with corollary reqtfirements for the conservation element and intergovernmental coordination element (see paragraphs 4 and 5 on page one of these guidelines). While these corollary requirements are not explicitly required for the completion of the Water Supply' Facilities Workplan due January 1,2005, it is recommended they be completed concurrently to provide assurance that the Workplan adequately addresses the water supply facilities needed t'or the projected I0 year period. The Workplan amendment should be adopted by' January 1,2005 or the EAR due date, whichever is earlier, tbr communities located in an area for which a RWSP has been adopted. , Commtmities located outside an area for which a RWSP has been adopted should adopt the Workptan and corollary' amendments by their EAR due date. Overview of Regional Water Supply Plans The tbllowing briel-lv summarizes the RWSPs to give an indication of the type of inrbrmation and assistance that is available from the x~ater management district. The attached map depicts the areas of the state tbr which RWSPs have been prepared. :\ R\VSP includes a pro ectio~x of x~ater demands and an identification of potential sources ofxvater to ~eet these demands. 'Fhe RWSP looks }brward in time tbr 20 ,,'ears and is intended to provide the framework lbr future water supply decisions in the areas ~xhere it has been dctcr~q~ined tl~at traditional sources of water are not adequate to provide tbr l'utt~re needs x~lqilc sustait~ing the water' resources and related natural systems. %'ithtn tl~esc area existing a~d rcason~xblv anticip:~ted sources or' water and conservation efforts ~llax iqot be adequate to I I ~ supply water lbr all existing legal users and reasonably' anticipated futt~re ~¢cds ~md (2/to sustain the water resources and related natural systems. Pace 7 of I2 The RWSP identifies potential water supply source options for water supply development, including traditional and alternative sources that will exceed the needs projected by the district. The RWSP also estimates the associated costs for developing these sources. The water source options identified in the RWSP represent a "menu" of options fbr water supply development from which local governments, government-owned and privately owned utilities, self-suppliers and others may choose. The options are provided as reasonable concepts that water users in the region can pursue in their water supply planning. Water users can select a water supply option as presented in the plan or combine elements of different options that better suit their water supply needs. Additionally, the plan provides information to assist water users in developing funding strategies to construct water supply development projects. For planning purposes, water use is separated into six basic categories: agriculture; public supply: domestic supply (including small public supply systems); commercial/industrial and mining/dev,'atering: thermoelectric power production: and recreatiow'aesthetic. The RWSP identifies potential sources of water capable of meeting projected demand, and options tbr developing those sources. Sources include (1) new well fields, (2) increased use of reclaimed water. (3) storage reservoirs, (4) surface water withdrawals, (5) aquifer storage and recovery. (6) reverse osmosis/desalination (7) conservation. The RWSP includes planning level analyses l-hr each of these sources of water to quantify available water supplies, identity development options, and estimate costs associated with water supply development. , The RWSP projects future water supply needs for 20 year~ and identifies the methods and assumptions used in projecting future demand. Sources of water anticipated to be available to meet current and future demands are identified, including a description of existing sources and the ability of each to assist in meeting current den-rands. The amount of water potentially available from each source to meet demands for 20 years is estimated. In addition, the projected demands are compared to available ,,,,ater sources in order to identit\' deficits that v:ould need to be met by alternative sources. The RWSP describes water supply projects currently under development tbr which districts are providing assistance. Finally, the RWSP contains a list or' water supply options that could potentially be developed by regional water supply authorities, public utilities. Ipcal governments, public private xxater users, etc. The ut)al of the R\\'%P is to identify sufficient sources of water w~thin the planning regio~ to meet projected x~arer demands. ¥','ater supply options and cost estimates are providecl to assist users in determining how best to meet their particular demands. It is anticipated that users ,.','ill choose an option or combine elements ot'difl-'erent options that best fit their needs tbr x,.ater supply dex elopment. Prior to future development of an',' water suppl.,. option, it will be necessary to meet tile conditions tbr issuance of and obtain all applicable permits. Folloxving a dectsion to pursue any option identified in the RWSP. tt xxillbe necessary Ibr the interested party lies I to conduct more detailed engineering. h.x drologic, economic and biological assessments to provide the necessary techmcal support tbr alex elol_~ng the option. Page 8 ot'12 Preliminary technical and financial feasibility analyses are conducted on selected options for each water source. These are considered to be planning level analyses and are prepared to more fully develop concepts for water supply and resource development options. The analyses provide reasonable estimates of the quantity of water that could be developed and the associated costs for development. Each RWSP is updated every five years. All the districts are developing updated information that will be available in the 2005 RWSP updates. Local governments should consult with their respective districts to obtain the latest and most detailed information available. SELECTED SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND CONTACTS Selected Data Sources' l. Water Management District publications, such as Regional Water Supply Plans. District Water Management Plans. 2. Monthly Public-Supply Water Use (withdrawals) tables. Available from the USGS. Richard Marella at 850-942-9500, tbr Northwest Florida WMD, Su,,vannee River WMD and South Florida WMD. Contact St. Johns River WMD and Southwest Florida WMD fbr similar tables. 3. Communities located in counties having a population, of greater than 100,000 will prepare a report by January I, 2004 which identifies ali interlocal service-delivery agreements, incltiding those that address water supply. Selected Contacts: South Florida W,.'xID Name: Henrx Bittaker { EAR Technical Assistance) Phone: s/c 229-6792: 561-682-6792: 800-432-2045. ext 0792 Fax: TBD e-mail: hbittuk Name: P.K. Sharma {LGCP Rev~ewsl Phone: s/c 229-6779:561-682-6779 800-432-2045. ext. 6779 Fax: TBD e-mail: psharma ~ st',,,,, md.~ox Lower East Coast RX,VSP': Jim Jackson:800-4.~2-2045 ext. K~ssimmee R\VSP' Chris Sxveazx': 800-250-4250 ext. 3822 Pa,~e 9 oi: l'~ Upper East Coast RWSP: Sharon Fowler; 800-432-2045 ext. 6155 Lower West Coast RWSP: Bonnie Kranzer; 800-248-1201 ext 7122 St. Johns River WMD Name: Jeff Cole Assistant Director, Office of Communications and Governmental Affairs St. Johns River Water Management District PO Box 1429 Palatka, FL 32178-1429 Phone: s/c 860-4497:386-329-4497 Fax: 386-329-4103 e-mail: jcole ~ s. jrx,,md.com Website: http:,'/sjr.state, fi.us Southwest Florida WMD Name: Richard Owen Phone: 352-796-7211 or 800-423-t476 Fax: e-mail: Richard.Owen'd'swt\vmd.state. t'l. us Website: v~'v, x~ .swl'\vmd.state.fl.us Suwannee River WMD Name: David Still (White Paper) Phone: 386-362-1001:800-226-1066 Fax: e-mail: still d ~ st'xx md.state, l'l.tls Website: xvxk x~ .sr,,~ md.state.t'l.us Nortl'~,,vest Florida \VXlD Name: Tyler Nlacmillan Phone: 850-539-5999: s.c 771-2080, ext. 133 Fax: 850-53t)-438() e-mail: 'i'~ lc~'.\lacmillan ~ nxvl\k md.state.fi.us 'kVebsite: http: SUl~O.dlnS.state.i'l.us FDEP Name: Janet Llex~ellx'n. Deputy Director. Division of Water Resources Nlanagement Phone: 850-488-0784': s,c 272-641)7 Fax: $50-4S,%2I lS c-mail: .lanct. I .!ex~cllx n ~z dcp.statc. I].us Page 10ofl2 Website: .Page 1 I ot-'12 Areas Where Water Supply Facilities Work Plan is Due by '.¥_'~ EAR-Based Amendment Due Date Areas Where Regional Water Supply Plans Have Been Prepared and Work Plan Must be Adopted by 1/I/05 r'~ NVVFVVMD -- Planning Region II r"'l SFWMD o- Klssimmee Basin r"ffl SFWMD -- Lower East Coast r~ SFWMD -- Lower West Coast r"""l SFWMD -- Upper East Coast r'~ SJRWMD pt"'1 SWFWMD -- Central and Southern Regions (31 Areas Where County Work Plans are Due by FAR Due Date as Shown, Earlier than 1/1/05 Due Date --'~ 2003 .¥~£ 2004 Regional Water Supply Plans Henry Bittaker, Senior Planner Water Supply Department Water Supply Planning: 1997 Amendments WMDs to perform water supply assessments to identify 20-year water sources WMDs to develop regional water supply plans for the regions that do not have sufficient sources Plans completed 2000; next update in 2005 Plans to provide a road map for meeting future needs, including water resource and water supply development options and cost estimates Plans are also to "sustain the water resources and related natural systems" Water Supply Plan Requirements Ch. 373 F.S. 20 year Planning Period 1-in-10 Level of Certainty Water Resource Development schedules, costs, funding strategies Water Supply Development options, effectiveness, estimated cost Minimum Flows and Levels (MFLs) recovery and prevention strategies Five Year Updates Water Supply and Water Resource Development Water supply development: Withdrawing water from source, treating and distribution to end users Water resource development: Making sure that water source is of sufficient quantity and quality for use Fresh Water Demand by WMD, 1995 and 2020 (million gallons per day) Water Supply Planning Update Schedules Districts NWFWMD SJRWMD SRWMD SWFWM D SFWMD Water Supply Assessment July 1, 2003 July 1, 2003 July 1, 2003 Sept. 1, 2004 Dec. 1, 2003 Regional Water .. Supply Plans October 2,005 April 2005 2005 ' Dec. 2005 June 2004- Dec. 2005 Water Supply Development Component The water supply development component shall include: Assessment of water supply needs for 1 in 10 year drought List of water source options which exceed the needs Water available from each source Costs and potential funding source for water supply development List of water supply development projects which could be considered for state or WMD funding Lower West Coast Bonnie Kranzer, Ph.D., AICP SFWMD Planning Regions Kissimmee Region Lower West Coast Lower East Coast Upper East Coast Lower West Coast Region Lower West Coast Population 1950 - 2020 Lower West Coast Land Use - 1995 Growth Characteristics One of the fastest-growing regions in the. U.S. 30% seasonal resident population Large winter tourist population ~ Growth in Iow-density golf course communities Coastal growth at peak, inland and upland riverine areas now under development High percentage of retirees living in SW Florida Lower West Coast Water Demand :L995 - 2020 (MGD) Lower West Coast Water Demand 1996 - 2020 (MGD) Lower West Coast Water Demand 1995 - 2020 Lower West Coast Generalized Cross-Section gr,:.,- .... ; Hydrologic Constraints Surface Water ~ primarily Caloosahatchee - limited availability due to current uses (irrigation 8, urban) and environmental ~needs Surfi¢ial Aquifer System heavy demands, central Lee, much of Collier & Hendry wetland protection and saltwater intrusion issues Hydrologic Constraints (con't) Intermediate Aquifer System Sandstone Aquifer, mainly ag uses in Hendry and Lee Counties Mid. Hawthorn not terribly productive, degrades southward Floridan Aquifer non-potable, degrades southward used by several utilities and ASR limited information, data and experience with use of Floridan 4200 square miles Planning horizon 2020 Population projected to double to almost 1 million 10 % increase in agricultural acreage to 260,000 acres 30 % increase in overall water demands to 1,100 MGD Conclusion The needs of this region can be met with appropriate management and diversification of water supply sources during a 1-in-10 year drought event through 2020. Planning ]:ssues... Coastal "historically used sources of water, primarily the Surficial Aquifer System in the urban coastal areas are not adequate to meet the growing needs of the area." Planning Issues .... Coastal (con't) Increased demands for public water supply & urban irrigation Potential for salt water · intrusion Potential for impacted ~'* .~: wetlands Need for diversification of sources Need to shift from Surficial to FIoridan Aquifer, reuse, and surface water Increased use of RO and ASR Planning Issues... Inland "In eastern portion (except the Caloosahatchee Basin) existing ground water sources are sufficient to meet the 2020 projected demands with mm~mal potential impacts. Some modifications to wellfleld configurations and well operation regimes will need to be done on project-by-project basis to avoid potential impacts to natural systems and other existing legal users." Water Resource Development Regional Irrigation Distribution System Feasibility Study Modeling and monitoring of Aquifer Regional Retention East County Water Control District Cape Coral Gator Slough Big Cypress Basin Projects Water Resource Development Caloosahatchee River Storage/ASR Project Southwest Florida Study Establish minimum flows & levels Water Supply Development Current Alternative Water Supply Development 6 utilities using Floridan aquifer 84% of wastewater being reused 26 aquifer storage and recovery projects Alternative Water Supply Grant Program Local Projects Conclusion The needs of this region can be met with appropriate management and diversification of water supply sources during a 1-in-lO year drought event through 2020. Visit our web site Technical Assistance Henry Bittaker Senior Planner Water Supply Department WMDs: Linking Water and Land Use Planning New SB 1906 Legislative Requirements Local government comprehensive plans must: Be coordinated with WMD regional water supply plans (potable water; conservation; intergovernmental coordination) By January 1. 2005 or the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) due date, whichever occurs first, contain a new 10 year water supply facilities work plan Use the EAR process to consider WMD regional water supply plans WMDs: Linking Water and Land Use Planning (con't) WMD "EAR" Technical Assistance Water Management Districts will: Provide technical information and assistance to local governments on water resource issues for both EARs and local government comp plan reviews Provide EAR training on Regional Water Supply Plans (RWSPs) Identify and make available appropriate data sources, including water supply data for individual local government broken out by utility service area (to the extent available) Participate in any voluntary EAR scoping meetings overnments Lower West Coast Planning Document 1. Introduction 2. Water Supply Planning Process 3. Planning Area Description 4. Analysis Methods and Issue Identification 5. Solution Development 6. Recommendations Lower West Coast Support Document 1. Introduction 2. Planning Area Description 3. Water Resources and System Overview 4. Natural Resources 5. Resource Regulation 6, Demand Estimates and Projections 7. Water Source Options 8. Water Quality and Treatment Lower West coast Appendices A. Florida Statues and Rules B. Rainfall Analysis C. Ground Water Resources Graphics D. Potable Water and Wastewater Treatment Facilities E. Wetlands and Environmentally Sensitive Areas F. Demand Estimates and Projections G. Water Quality H. Water Source Options: Reclaimed and ASR I. Hydrogeologic Data Summary Visit our web site SFWMD Technical Assistance Web-based Assistance (www.sfwmd.gov) Plans currently available online: Regional Water Supply Plans District Water Management ~ Other plans and technical information (CERP, SW1M, SOR) <Coming Soon> Local government EAR assistance web-page District Coordinator Contact: Henry Bittaker Phone: (561) 682-6792 Lower West Coast Water Supply Discussion Points Reuse In 2001, treated 71 MGD of wastewater and reused 89% (63.34 MGD). GREAT!! Collier & Lee counties have some of the highest per capita reuse rates in the State reusing 107 & 80 GPD per person, respectively. Need to take reuse to the next step - Utilities need to maximize the use of reclaimed through ~ne~s with other reclaimed water system_s, const___~tion of reclaimed water seasonal storage fac~es such as ASR, and development of supplemental sources such as surface water. Local governments and utilities should support development of a Regional Irrigation Distribution S'ystem (RIDS) being pursued by the District. Wastewater discharges to surface water should be discouraged. Utilities should implement conservation measures'on reclaimed water systems once they develop seasonal storage facilities, including metering and charging based on volume used. Local governments should consider establishing mandat6ry reuse zones in undeveloped areas and/or on a retrofit basis in developed areas that require installation of reclaimed water systems in new developments and use of reclaimed ~ter to encourage use of reclaimed water. Local governments, utilities, and water users need to cooperatively work together to implement water reuse effectively. Water Supply Need to continue diversification of supply sources. About 50% of the water allocated for PWS is from brackish water sources. Need to develop alternative water sources for irrigation. The LWCWSP concluded ground water and reclaimed water are not going to be sufficient to meet the needs. Local governments and utilities should support development of a Regional Irrigation Distribution Sy~L,_,n (RIDS) being pursued by the District. Continue to implement conservation measures. Encourage retrofit for some of the measures such as rain sensors. 8:30 Registration AGENDA 9:00 - 9:15 Welcome David Burr, SWFRPC Mike McDaniel, DCA 9:15- 10:15 Evaluati0h & Appraisal Report (EAR) Process for Preparing an EAR Content Requirements for an EAR The EAR Analysis · The Scoping Meeting Walker Banning, DCA 10:15- I0:30 Break 10:30- I l:45 Major issues: A Regional Perspective Growth Patterns · Transportation · Wildlife · Hurricane Evacuation · Platted lands David Crawford. SWFRPC Ken Heatherington, SWFRPC Jim Beever, FFWCC Dan Trescott. SWFRPC Wayne Daltry, Lee County 11:45 - 12:45 Lunch (catered pizza or on your own) 12:45 - 1:45 Affordable Housing · Objectives · Indicators · Data Resources Planning Strategies Ja~.mie Ross, 1000 Friends of Florida William O'Dell, Shirnberg Center 1:45 - 3:45 3:45 -4:00 Coordinating Land Use and Water Supply Planning · Water Supply Workplan · Regional Water Supply Plans Break Mike McDaniel. DCA Henry Bittaker. SFWMD Bom'fie Kranzer, SFWMD Dianne McCommons Beck. SWFWMD 4:00 - 4:45 Coordinating Land Use and School Facility Planning · Objectives Paul O'Connor. Lee County · Indicators Mike McDaniel. DCA · Data Resources · Planning Strategies 4:45 Closing Remarks Mike McDaniel, DCA Evaluation & Appraisal Report (EAR) Workshop with Collier County Board of County Commissioners Purpose: Identify Local and Regional Issues As Related to the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP) What is the GMP? The GMP performs the following functions: · Guides land use decisions by location, type, intensity and timing · Pmteclion of natural ~sources · Financing and provision of public facilities Florida Statutes require the EAR Over time, communities change: ~k These changes may or not may be consistent with the growth patterns anticipated during the preparation and adoption of the first EAR-based GMP amendments in 1997, which resulted in the Final Order. Florida Statutes require the EAR Over time, communities change:, continued · The GMP needs to be updated every seven years to reflect changing conditions and subsequent community priorities. In conjunction with the EAR, three new requirements are added to: - Coordination with school planning - Coordination with water supply planning - Non-conforming densities in Coastal High- Hazard Areas Purpose of the EAR · To evaluate changed conditions and community priorities in order to determJtle whether the needs to be amended. · To examine the effectiveness of the adopted GMP since the previous EAR. Overview of the EAR Workshop The focus of this workshop is to review the GMP's functionality in relation to the following issues: - Orderly growth management - Supporting high wage, technology-based economic development - Community Character Plan/quality of life standards - Protection of the natural resources of the Count~ - Meeting other BCC initiatives as they evolve through the local legislative process The EAR Focuses on Local/ssues Unlike the first EAR, not.every G.O.P. needs to be individually analyzed; instead, only those major, local issues that affect Collier County's ability to achieve its goals. A brief evaluation of each Element and Sub-element of the GMP is required in addition to the previously identified local and regional issues. Linking Specific Local Issues to the GMP's Respective Elements Capital Improvements Element: * Issue #t: Financial Feasibility/Revenue Streams Issue #2: Real-time Checkbook Concurrency Issue #3: 10-Year Water Resoumes Plan & Capital Improvements Issue ~,4: Update of Support Documentation Linking Specific Local Issues to the GMP's Respective Elements Transportation Element: · k Issue #1: Update transportation concurrency management database · Issue #2: Identify and acknowledge vested development · Issue ~.3: Financially feasible lO-Year Work program Linking Specific Local Issues to the GMP's Respective Elements Transp°~tion Elemer~i continued: · Issue #4: Suitability of adopted LOS and measurement criteria Issue ~.5: Update support documentation Linking Specific Local Issues to the GMP's Respective Elements Housing: ~c Issue #1: New definitions of ~'affordable housing" and ~orkforce housing" * Issue #2: Reexamine lhe affordable housing inventory and goals over the 5-year planning horizon ~c Issue ~k3: Ap..I.~3rtionment of rievelopment approval Dwelling Units to wor~orce housing markels * Issue #4: Update support documentation Linking Specific Local Issues to the GMP~s Respective Elements Recreation and Open spac~ ........ · Issue #1: Should the Element be repealed per eilmieaiton of statutory requirements? Issue #2: Maintain LOS for regional and community park land Issue #3: Maintain funding for recreation facilities = $24(}.00 capital investments/capita 4 Linking Specific Local Issues to the GMP's Respective Elements ~ - ,u~--- · ; :~ ' 7 ~-- :,,-,'~,' ~ · Issue ~: C~rdination of schooE~ siting · I~ue ~: In~r~mte LOS to e~sting funding program g~red to pro~ing public a~ to b~h~, s~r~ and ~te~ · I~ue ~: Update suppo~ d~umen~tion Linking Specific Local Issues to the GMP's Respective Elements Conservation ;~nd Coastal Management Element: · Issue #1: Review impact of the Final Order-based amendments Issue ~'2: Review emergency management issues Issue ~3: An evaluation of all residential vested properties within the coastal high-hazard area. Would a reduction in land use density impair the property dghts of current residents when redevelopment occum? Linking Specific Local Issues to the GMP's Respective Elements Conservation and Coastal Management Element, continued: · Issue #4: Update support documentation Linking Specific Local Issues to the GMP's Respective Elements Intergovernmental Coordination Element: ~ Issue #1: Update to reflect current Rule 9J-5 requirements Issue #2: Evaluate coordination with applicable governmental entities Issue #3: Update support documentation Linking Specific Local Issues to the GMP's Respective Elements Future Land Use Element: ~k Issue #1: Evaluate the location and number of redevelopment areas Issue ~r2: Updated inventory ef industrial and commemial land uses and Iocational criteria Issue #,3: Assess the need for provision of neighberhocd commemial development Linking Specific Local Issues to the GMP's Respective Elements Future Land Use Element, continued: · 1~ Issue #4: Assess impact of the Final Order-based amendments Issue #5: A reassessmenl of antiquated platted subdivisions Issue #6: Examine the validity of the Traffic Congestion Boundary Linking Specific Local Issues to the GMP's Respective Elements F~:-ure Land Use Ele~t~'c°ntlnUedi~ * Issue #7: Examine the validity of the Urban Residential Fringe Sub-district * Issue #8: Reexamine the functionality and definition of the Activity Center Sub-district * Issue #9: Address school siting criteria * Issue #10: Update support documentation Linking Spec/ftc Local Issues to the GMP's /Respective Elements lmmokalee A[ea Master Plan: * Issue #1: APlx]inl Advisory commiflee and Initiate restudy. Issue #2: Road improvements. Issue #,3: Coordination of economic incentives. IssUe ~: Quality and quantity of affordable housing stock. Linking Specific Local Issues to the GMP's Respective Elements Immokalee A~'ea Master Plan, continued: * Issue #.5: Ave Ma[ia Univemity and town, impacts on the Immokalee Urban Area. issue #~: Immokalee Regional ~rt and related future land uses. Issue #7: Reevaluate the size of the Immokalea Urban Area with possible contraction considerations. /inking Specific/oca/Issues to the GMP's Respective Elements Imm0kaie~'Area Ma~e~.-Pian,~ontinued: · Issue gs: The impact of the Rural Lands Stewardship Ares on the Master Plan. Issue #9: Update supporl documentation. Linking Specific Local Issues to the GMP's Respective E/ements * Note: The Restudy Committee will complete ils assigned tasks and sunset in June 2003 and/he amendments to implement the 2-year restudy will be adol~ed in the 2002 and 2003 Comprehensive Plan Amendment cycles. Linking Specific Local Issues to the GMP's Respective Elements public FaCiiitie~ 'E-]-~-: ....... * Issue #1: Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element GOP's for currency with extant demands and conditions ~ Issue #2: Potable Water Sub-Element GOP's for currency with extant demands and conditions * Issue #3: Development otWater Resources Supply Sub-Element for 10--year supply in conjunction with SFVVMD in developing the Lower West Coast Water Supply Plan Linking Specific Local Issues to the GMP's Respective Elements Public Facilities Element~ continued * Issue #4: Drainage Sub-Element GOP's for cun-ency with extant demands and conditions * Issue #5: Solid Waste Sub-Element GOP's for currency with extant demands and conditions, and fulure landfill needs * Issue #6: NGWAR Sub-Element for currency with extant conditions and demands and its interrelationship with the new Water Resources Supply Sub-Element Linking Specific Local Issues to the GMP's Respective Elements Public Faciliti~ Element * I~ue ~7: U~ale all Su~Elemen~' sup~d docomen~tion Linking Specific Local Issues to the GMP's Respective Elements Marco Island Area Master Plan: · Issue #1: Repeal Master Plan and account for unincorporated areas in the FLUE What Ioca/ Issues are not Being Addressed by the GMP? Additional Areas for exP!0ration during the EAR process: ,k Issue #1: ? * Issue #2: ? ~ Issue ~3 ? ,1~ Issue #4: ? ,1~ Issue #5: ? Next Steps in the EAR Process · Click on the EAR process flowchart Upcoming, Tentative EAR Deadlines :~-~"~'~:L'--p._ .... "~ .~'-~=_?~ p .~ i! ·Click on the EAR calendar 10 We are at this stage of the EAR process IDENTIFY WHO WILL PREPARE EAR 3. PREPARE LIST OF ISSUES 4. AGENCIES I MEETING COLLECT DATA ANALYZE DATA 5. FINAL LIST OF ISSUES FOR EAR 6. PREPARE 'ls'r DRAFT OF EAR 8. REVISE EAR 9. TRANSMIT PROPOSED EAR TO DCA 10.EAR REVISE BOARD OF COUNTY'~ COMMISSIONERS & GENERAL PUBU~ CoMMiSSION&aCc .: COMMISSION & BCC & ~ SUFFICIENT 13.A. BEGIN PLAN AMENDMENTS ADOPTED SUFFICIENT 13.B.AMEND EAR Actual hue Approximate Time Step in the Process bate to Complete :ZS-:Z8 months lo Zdentify who will prepeme the before EAR and who is responsible - 3/?:Z/2003 scheduled due date D~ren/~lenn due date - :Z4 to Z5 months 2o Local workshop to identify 4/29/04 before due date subject matter (issues) and $. P~epare the list of issues :Z2 to :Z4 months 4° Workshop with agency 5/:Z5/0~, before due date ~el~esentatives and tentative 5o Prepare final list of issues (Scoping Letter) ! ~ week 6 to ! 2 months 6. Complete a first draft of the of `Tune, before due date EAR tentative $~ week +5 months before 7. Public hearing with LPA on of .Tune, due date first draft tentative .Tune SO*h, _+4 months before 8. Revise first draft, as needed tentative due date $ months (gO days) 9. Transmit proposed EAR to 2st week before due date DCA and of .Tuly, other reviewing agencies tentative (optional) 1~ week 2 months befor~ Receive comments from DCA of due date November Z to 2 months :ZOo Revise first draft and November before due date produce final EAR for adoption November/ 0 to z month before 11. Public Hearing with elected December due date body and adoption of the EAR ~HEDULED DUE :~2. Transmit to DCA & :~/1/2004 DATE reviewing agencies 2 months (60 days) Preliminary comments from after DCA receives DCA regarding determination EAR of sufficiency $ months (90 days) Finding of Sufficiency or after DCA receives Finding of Not Sufficient EAR :~2 months after Submit proposed plan finding of amendments based on the EAR sufficiency (or !8 months if extension requested) ~ :~8 months after Adop~t plan amendments based finding of on the EAR sufficiency (or 24 months if an extension is requested) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY UPDATE ON REVISIONS TO COLLIER cOUNTY'S LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE (LDC), KNOWN IN THE INTERIM AS THE UNIFIED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE (MDC). OBJECTIVE: To review the progress made to date in revising the County's land development regulations. To obtain Board direction on a proposed amendment to the existing contract to The Gail Eas. ley Company for professional services performed in updating the Collier County Land Development Code to Unified Land Development Code (UDC). CONSIDERATIONS: During the Spring of 2002, the Board approved The Gail Easley Company to perform professional services to update the LDC under Contract # 02-3293. At this point, the LDC Team believes a slight modification to the existing contract is needed to further develop regulations pertaining to the classification of permissible uses. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners provide staff direction to proceed with an amendment to the existing professional services a'greement to the Gail Easley Company; and advise the consultant and staff of any specific revisions they believe may be deemed warrant~X) SUBMITTED B Y:¥ Cvtl4,L~\ ~ Date:'~ Patrick G."~N'h).te .... ' z -' '"t ' Assistant County Attorney & Project Manager APPROVED BY:/" Date: / ,]'oseph K. Schmitt, Administrator t/ /Community Development and Environmental Services